Critique of interpretive approach (1)Some argue that antipositivists/ post positivists have gone too far in abandoning scientific

procedures of verification and in giving up hope of discovering useful generalizations about behaviour. Are there not dangers in rejecting the approach of physics in favour of methods more similar to literature, biography and journalism? Some specific criticisms of the methodologies are well directed (page 21). Brenstiens criticism is directed at the overriding concern of phenomenologists and ethnomethodologists with the meanings of the situations and the ways in which these meanings are negotiated by the actors involved. What is overlooked about such negotiated meanings, observes Bernstien, is that the very process whereby one interprets and defines a situation is itself a product of the circumstances in which one is placed. One important factor in such circumstances that must be considered is the power, of others to impose their own definitions of the situations upon participants. Doctors consulting rooms and headteachers studies are locations in which inequalities in power are regularly imposed upon unequal participants. The ability of certain individuals, groups, classes and authorities to persuade others to accept their definitions of situations demonstrates that while- as ethnomethodologists insist- social structure is a consequence of the ways in which we perceive social relation, it is clearly more than this. Conceiving of social structure as external to ourselves helps us take its self evident effects upon our daily lives into our understanding of the social behavipor going on about us. Here is rehearsed the tension between agency and structure of social theorists(layder, 1994); the danger of interactionist and interpretive approaches is their relative neglect of the power of exteranalstructural forces to shape behaviour and events.

There is a risk in interpretive approaches that they become hermetically sealed from the world outside the participants theatre of activity- they put artificial boundaries around subjects behaviour. Just as positivistic theories can be criticized for their macrosociologic persuasion, so interpretive and qualitative models can be criticized for their narrowly microsociological perspectives.
Macrosociology is an approach to the discipline which emphasizes the analysis of social systems and populations on a large scale, at the level of social structure, and often at a necessarily high level of theoretical abstraction.[1] Microsociology, by contrast, focuses on the individual social agency. Macrosociology also concerns individuals, families, and other constituent aspects of a society, but always does so in relation to larger social system of which they are a part. Macrosociology can also be the analysis of large collectivities (eg. the city, the church).[2] Human populations are considered a society to the degree that is politically autonomous and its members to engage in a broad range of cooperative activities.[3] For example, this definition would apply to the population of Germany being deemed a society, but German-speaking people as a whole scattered about different countries would not be considered a society.[3] Macrosociology deals with broad societal trends that can later be applied to the smaller features of a society. To differentiate, macrosociology deals with issues such as war, distress of Third World nations, poverty, and environmental deprivation, whereas microsociology analyses issues such as the role of women, the nature of the family, and immigration.[3]

Microsociology is one of the main branches (or focuses) of sociology, concerning the nature of everyday human social interactions and agency on a small scale. Microsociology is based on interpretative analysis rather than statistical or empirical observation, and shares close association with the philosophy of phenomenology. Methods includes symbolic interactionism and ethnomethodology; ethnomethodology in particular has led to many academic sub-divisions and studies such as microlinguistical research and other related aspects of human social behaviour. Macrosociology, by contrast, concerns the social structure and broader systems.